IAEA: Iran tripled higher-grade uranium production

[NOI4I]

Source: Reuters

IAEA: Iran tripled higher-grade uranium production
By REUTERS
Last updated: 03/05/2012 14:45
Amano voices "serious concern" over Tehran's nuclear program to UN atomic watchdog's 35-nation governing board.


Read more: http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=260522

---

I hope it resolves with sanctions, but clearly, fanatical Mullachracy of Islamic Republic's nukes is a global threat.

[Hugabear]

1. Still waiting for solid proof that Iran is building nuclear weapons

We've been down this road before - military action against a country suspected accused of building nuclear weapons.

[Mosby]

2. Nothing solid but the Iranians are refusing access

snip

During the meetings in the Iranian capital in January and February, Iranian officials stonewalled the IAEA's requests for access to a military site seen as central to its investigation into the nature of the Islamic state's nuclear activity.

"The agency continues to have serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program," Amano told the closed-door meeting, according to a copy of his speech.

The IAEA "is unable to provide credible assurance about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran, and therefore to conclude that all nuclear material in Iran is in peaceful activities," he added.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/iaea-voices-serious-concerns-about-possible-military-dimensions-to-iran-nuclear-program-1.416620

[Hugabear]

3. Saddam did the same thing

Saddam played all kinds of cat-and-mouse games with UN inspectors, and would often refuse access to various areas.

In that case, it was more about exercising his sovereignty and screwing with the UN.

[leveymg]

4. Do you have any idea how bigoted this sounds? "fanatical Mullachracy of Islamic Republic's nukes"

If you said "fanatical Rabinocracy of Jew State's nukes" you'd have half a dozen Alerts by now. As it is, not many people even noticed your slurs because the so many are deaf from the constant propaganda din . . . and, this is supposed to be a progressive, anti-war crowd. Tells you how dangerous things really are.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. Your example is bigoted. The other is not.

Mullah is a religious leader, which currently lead the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is Iran's official name. The combination word, mullachracy, is combining mullah and theocracy. Iran is a theocracy. "Islamic" and "Jew" used as an adjective are not the same. While the line may be biased and propaganda-oriented, it is not bigoted. Your example is. However, an actual comparison, which is not bigoted, and just as propaganda-laden would be "fanatical Rabbinocracy of the Judaic State's nukes." It would be a combination ot "rabbinical," meaning lead by Rabbis (as opposed to Rabin, an Israeli leader) and "theocracy." Israel, however, unlike Iran, is not a theocracy except among anti-Israel propagandists and the uneducated.

[leveymg]

9. That is very much a distinction without a distinction, without a difference. And, you're wrong.

By the standards of secular western states, Israel is in many ways a theocracy, if you define it as a state where religious institutions and bodies have a formal role in shaping the administration of law, and where automatic membership in the state on religious grounds is determined by a body of clerics. As for the distinction, it's between one nn and two and a choice of adjectives.

How about engaging the issue on a substantial level, rather than being pedantic?

[Behind the Aegis]

15. Being pedantic was needed, especially in addressing your nonsense.

But, I wasn't wrong and you're simply trying to create an issue where there is none, in order to avoid the actual topic.

[leveymg]

16. The topic, as I see it, is bigotry and those who deny it exists except among those whom they believe

to be their enemies. And, even about that, they're wrong.

To mindlessly condemn Iran as a warlike threat to the world on the basis that they enrich uranium, particularly by states that have hundreds or thousands of actual nuclear weapons (and in the case of the US, have actually used them, twice), strikes me as being the most extreme form of hypocrisy; and, to say Iran is particularly bad because it's a "Mullocracy" is also manifest bigotry.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. The topic was an IAEA report.

I see the same issue, though, when Israel is invoked. There is no denying their is bigotry against Muslims, but this isn't an example, despite your best efforts to create such a situation. Commenting on their potential threat and declaring they're a theocracy is not the same thing, cdespite the best efforts to convolute the situation and make it about something it isn't.

[leveymg]

18. I chose to focus on the comment of the OP. I hope you'll grant that's a legitimate topic.

If you honestly don't see that comment as expressing bigotry, I don't know what to say to you.

[Behind the Aegis]

19. It is actually off-topic, but still allowable.

It is one of the reasons I don't think comments should be allowed in LBN thread-starters. It isn't bigoted despite your best efforts. You are reading into it. Discussions of Islamophobia are important, and sadly needed. However, just because someone doesn't like Iran or uses it's officical name doesn't mean it is bigoted anymore than it is bigoted to refer to Israel as the Jewish state and go on a tear about how evil and dangerous that country is, and that is something you will see here on almost a daily basis. You think that is also bigoted? Somehow, I seriously doubt it.

[leveymg]

20. I think it's also bigoted.

Any group of self-identifying people are welcome to run their own state on their own land in their own way provided they don't harm their neighbors. That goes for Israel as well as Iran and Palestine.

[Behind the Aegis]

21. Good to know.

I'll keep that in mind.

[bananas]

10. You must be new here - religion bashing is de rigueur on DU. nt

[leveymg]

11. Ya, ya - so is giving bigots shit back for it. ;-)

[Bradical79]

12. How is that bigoted?

Iran is a theocracy lead by a supreme leader (who is a Mullah) and refers to itself as an Islamic Republic. Just because someone doesn't want to invade a country, doesn't mean they have to ignore what a danger Iran could be.

[leveymg]

13. The threats and hyperbole makes the regime more, not less, dangerous. Bigotry and hatred feed on

each other. You can insult them, but it is becoming the sole accepted form of discourse with reference to the latest, greatest neocon monster of the month.

Propaganda framing has narrowed the conceivable options to sanctions or war, and is moving toward war. That's how we got into Iraq. If you liked that, you will LOVE Iran.

[ronnie624]

14. How does one determine the degree to which one country is a threat to others?

What, exactly, are the criteria? Do they include an actual propensity for and history of aggression that has resulted in the deaths of millions? Perhaps the number of invasions conducted in recent history plays a role in making such a determination?

If so, I can think of a country that is FAR more threatening than Iran.

[fujiyama]

6. Global threat?

That's a bit much. It's a two bit military force, with a crack pot figurehead ruled by a bunch of religious nuts.

A regional threat? Arguably. A serious threat to Israel? Of course.

But the world has already seen NK and Pakistan become nuclear powers. Iran joining the club doesn't really alter things that much. Now, I agree we should pursue sanction as we are doing, but military force would be a disaster in this case. Ultimately even if Israel decides to attack it would not be in our interests to assist them in any way.

[Devil_Fish]

7. I bet the US still out produces them.

And which country actually nuked a civilian population not just once, but twice officially and much more if you count DU.

[cocorocotum]

8. OK

if the USA fight for democracy, Iran must have nukes to !

[EFerrari]

23. This story is from the JPost so it needs to be checked against a decent source. n/t

[Comrade Grumpy]

24. "clearly, fanatical Mullachracy of Islamic Republic's nukes is a global threat"

Please elaborate. It's not at all clear to me.